The Hague Service Convention A Practical Step Towards Greater International Legal Cooperation

The Hague Service Convention: A Practical
Step Towards Greater International Legal

Cooperation
Aileen Charisse P. Cruz *
I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 267

II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION ................ 269
A. A Brief History of the HCCH and the Service Convention
B. Scope and Applicability of the Service Convention
C. Protection of the Defendant
III. APPLICATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION ON THE SERVICE
OF JUDICIAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL DOCUMENTS IN CIVIL OR
COMMERCIAL MATTERS ............................................................. 281
A. Overview of the Supreme Court Guidelines on the Implementation in
the Philippines of the Service Convention on the Service Abroad of
Judicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters
B. Operation of the Service Convention under the 2019 Revised Rules of
Civil Procedure
IV. DEVELOPING AND EMERGING ISSUES ON THE OPERATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION..................... 295
A. On the Mandatory Nature of the Service Convention
B. Application of the Service Convention in Arbitration Proceedings
C. Transmission of Documents via Postal Channels, E-mail, and Social
Media
V. CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 303
* ’16 J.D., with honors, Ateneo de Manila University School of Law. The Author is
a Senior Associate at the Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz (ACCRA) Law
Offices. The views expressed in this publication are those of the Author’s. They do
not reflect the opinions or views of Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz
(ACCRA) Law Offices and its members.
Cite as 66 ATENEO L.J. 266 (2021).

2021] HAGUE SERVICE CONVENTION 267
I. INTRODUCTION
On 4 March 2020, the Philippines deposited its instrument of accession 1 to
the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial
Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (Service Convention). 2 The
Service Convention falls under the auspices of the Hague Conference on
Private International Law (HCCH), 3 the leading global organization for the
“progressive unification of the rules of private international law[,]” 4 and was
established to “overcome the challenges of cross-border procedures” through
the framework of international conventions and other instruments. 5
Prior to the accession of the Philippines to the Service Convention,
transmissions of judicial documents for extraterritorial service were generally
made through diplomatic or consular channels. 6 Outbound documents
originating from Philippine courts were first transmitted to the Department of
Foreign Affairs (DFA) main office in Manila, after which the said office would
forward the documents to the Philippine Embassy or Consulate General of the
State of destination. 7 Afterwards, the Embassy or Consulate General would
request the host Ministry of Foreign Affairs to have the court documents
1. Department of Foreign Affairs, PH Deposits Instrument of Accession to the

Hague Conference on Private International Law, available at
https://dfa.gov.ph/dfa-news/news-from-our-foreign-service-
postsupdate/26142-ph-deposits-instrument-of-accession-to-the-hague-
conference-on-private-international-law (last accessed July 31, 2021)
[https://perma.cc/J2ZW-C57D].
2. Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in
Civil or Commercial Matters, signed Nov. 15, 1965, 658 U.N.T.S. 163
[hereinafter Hague Service Convention].
3. Id. arts. 26 & 28.
4. Statute of the Hague Conference on Private International Law art. 1, adopted Oct.
31, 1951, 220 U.N.T.S. 121 (entered into force July 15, 1955).
5. Dr. Gérardine Goh Escolar, First Secretary, Permanent Bureau of the Hague
Conference on Private International Law, Statement of the Hague Conference on
Private International Law, Address at the Sixth Committee of the 74th Session of
the United Nations General Assembly (Oct. 11, 2019) (transcript available at
https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/74/pdfs/statements/rule_of_law/hcch.pdf
(last accessed July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/V7AG-6W3R]).
6. J. Eduardo Malaya & Jilliane Joyce R. De Dumo-Cornista, The HCCH
Conventions and Their Practical Effects to Private International Law in the Philippines,
45 IBP J. 41, 66-67 (2020).
7. Id.
268 ATENEO LAW JOURNAL [vol. 66:266
served by local authorities, and at other times, send the documents by

registered mail directly. 8 As for inbound documents originating from abroad,
they would first be transmitted to the State of origin’s Ministry of Foreign
Affairs. 9 The former office would then transmit the documents to DFA’s main
office, which in turn would transmit the same to the Executive Judge of the
area where service is to be effected, with a request to serve them.10
Service of judicial documents under the Service Convention and Supreme
Court Guidelines may be made through the Central Authorities of the
Contracting State11 without need for, and without discarding, the much
slower diplomatic and consular routes of transmission.
The Service Convention streamlines the channels of transmission for
service abroad of judicial or extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial
matters from one Contracting State to the other Contracting State. 12 At the
same time, it ensures that the rights of the defendant are sufficiently
protected. 13 The Service Convention “does not address or comprise
substantive rules relating to the actual service of process.” 14 As an international
agreement entered by the Philippines, the Service Convention forms part of
Philippine law. 15 As a procedural law, it works as an effective tool that
facilitates and simplifies the transmission of documents from one State to
another State, 16 and provides a framework for the Philippines to join the
8. Id. at 67. See also De Midgeley v. Ferandos, G.R. No. L–34314, 64 SCRA 23, 33
(1975).
9. Malaya & De Dumo-Cornista, supra note 6, at 67.
10. Id.
11. HCCH, PRACTICAL HANDBOOK ON THE OPERATION OF THE SERVICE
CONVENTION XLVI, ¶ 7 (2016).
12. Malaya & De Dumo-Cornista, supra note 6, at 65 (citing HCCH, supra note 11,
at XLV, ¶ 1).
13. HCCH, supra note 11, at XLV, ¶ 1 & LII, ¶ 28.
14. Id. at XLV, ¶ 1.
15. PHIL. CONST. art. II, § 2 (“The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of
national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as
part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice,
freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.”).
16. HCCH, supra note 11, at XLV, ¶ 1.
international cooperation for a more unified transnational service of processes

and court documents. 17
An immediate benefit of the Service Convention is the expansion of
options for a party litigant to serve extraterritorial service of summons abroad
through the Central Authority of the Contracting State, which is the
centerpiece and principal innovation of the Service Convention. 18 At the same
time, the rights of the defendant are protected, as the purpose of the Service
Convention is also “to create appropriate means to ensure that judicial and
extra-judicial documents to be served abroad shall be brought to the notice of
the addressee in sufficient time[.]” 19 As the Philippines participates in greater
cooperation in the field of private international law, the practical effects (and
benefits) of joining the Hague Conventions will result in better efficiency and
the orderly settlement of disputes, greater certainty and predictability, good
governance, reduction of cross-border transactions and litigation costs, and
overall governance of the rule of law. 20
II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION
A. A Brief History of the HCCH and the Service Convention

The HCCH convened as early as 1893, and its first session gathered delegates
from 13 States in an international conference on the regulation of issues
relating to civil procedure and jurisdiction. 21 Since then, the HCCH has since
expanded to 89 members across the continents, 22 and has promoted its
effective cooperative mechanisms in the private international law setting,
especially in the fields of international family and child protection law,
17. Rikki Daniele Louis A. Dela Paz, Expanding the Rules on Summons: Assessing
the Viability of Philippine Accession to the Hague Service Convention &
Providing Key Learnings from British and American Civil Procedure: A Treatise
on Summons (2017) (unpublished J.D. thesis, De La Salle University College of
Law) (on file with De La Salle University College of Law).
18. Richard J. Hawkins, Dysfunctional Equivalence: The New Approach to Defining
“Postal Channels” under the Hague Service Convention, 55 UCLA L. REV. 205, 213-
14 (2007).
19. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, pmbl.
20. See Escolar, supra note 5.
21. HCCH, History, available at https://www.hcch.net/en/test-stu/history (last
accessed July 3i, 2021) [https://perma.cc/8GG8-49FT].
22. HCCH, Members, available at https://www.hcch.net/en/states/hcch-members
(last accessed July. 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/8V7P-GFRN].
international civil procedure and the recognition of documents, and

international commercial and financial law. 23
The first successful Hague Convention was ratified by 14 European
countries and laid the groundwork for the several Conventions on family law,
as well as the Convention on Civil Procedure, which was signed on 17 July
1905. 24 The HCCH’s modern Conventions have taken the matter of
international civil procedure in three separate Conventions to address service
of documents abroad (the Service Convention), 25 taking of evidence abroad
(Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or
Commercial Matters (Evidence Convention), 26 and legal aid, deposits for
costs, safe conduct of witnesses and detention of foreign debtors, lumped
together (Convention of 15 October 1980 on International Access to Justice)
(1980 Convention in International Access to Justice). 27 The “three ‘modern
Conventions’ reflect a determined effort on the part of the Conference to
build a bridge between countries having civil law procedural system ... and
common law countries[.]” 28
The shift, however, from the States’ use of diplomatic and consular
channels to judicial and administrative channels through the Central
Authorities was largely in part due to the growth of international procedural
processes following the World War II. 29 After this time, countries around the
world gradually shed their global and judicial isolationist policies, and the
increased participation in international business and commerce would lead to
more cross-border litigation. 30 Many countries were ill-equipped to handle
the rise in international disputes, considering that internationally acceptable
means of service process had not yet been established.31
23. Escolar, supra note 5. See also id.

24. Georges A.L. Droz, A Comment on the Role of the Hague Conference on Private
International Law, 57 L. & CONTEMP. PROBS. 3, 3-4 (1994).
25. Id. at 4.
26. Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters,
opened for signature Mar. 18, 1970, 847 U.N.T.S. 231.
27. Convention on International Access to Justice, signed Oct. 25, 1980, 1510
U.N.T.S. 375 & Droz, supra note 24, at 4.
28. Id.
29. Id.
30. See Hawkins, supra note 18, at 210-11.
31. Id. at 211.
In October 1964, the HCCH convened to formulate a convention on

regulating the transmission of judicial and extrajudicial documents between its
member nations. 32 The Service Convention addressed an inherent problem in
the service of processes where fundamental differences existing between civil
and common law legal systems were concerned, which often exposed litigants
to unpredictability and uncertainty in legal relations. 33 Further, it sought to
meet the objectives of the drafters in three ways: “(a) it creates a new and
specific governmental method for service of documents from abroad by each
signatory [S]tate; (b) it regulates previous methods of service; and (c) it
regulates the method for obtaining default judgments when documents are
served abroad.” 34
The Philippines joined the HCCH in 2010. 35 On 1 October 2020, the
Service Convention entered into force for the Philippines after it deposited its
instrument of accession on 4 March 2020. 36 Currently, the Service
Convention has 79 Contracting Parties. 37
B. Scope and Applicability of the Service Convention

According to the HCCH, the Service Convention is both efficient and
effective, with statistical data showing that 75% of requests are executed within
two months. 38 Prior to the Service Convention, outbound documents coursed
through diplomatic or consular channels for extraterritorial service abroad had
32. Id. at 212 (citing Leonard A. Leo, The Interplay Between Domestic Rules Permitting
Service Abroad by Mail and the Hague Convention on Service: Proposing an Amendment
to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 22 CORNELL INT’L L.J. 335, 340 (1989)).
33. Hawkins, supra note 18, at 212.
34. Stephen F. Downs, The Effect of the Hague Convention on Service Abroad of Judicial
and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, 2 CORNELL INT’L L.J.
125, 130 (1969).
35. HCCH, Member: Philippines, available at
https://www.hcch.net/en/states/hcch-members/details1/?sid=121 (last accessed
July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/6G9U-4UV5].
36. HCCH, Status Table, available at
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-table/?cid=17 (last
accessed July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/VLG2-UVCG].
37. Id.
38. HCCH, Service Section, available at https://www.hcch.net/en/instru-
ments/conventions/specialised-sections/service (last accessed July 31, 2021)
[https://perma.cc/FNJ7-SUW3].
a turnaround time of four to six months for the service, and on some occasions,
with no return or result of service. 39
The Service Convention “shall apply in all cases, in civil or commercial
matters, where there is occasion to transmit a judicial or extrajudicial
document for service abroad[;]” 40 however, the Service Convention shall not
apply where the address of the person to be served with the judicial or
extrajudicial document is not known. 41 Thus, for the Service Convention to
be applicable, the following requirements must be met:
(1) A document is to be transmitted from one State Party to the [Service]
Convention to another State Party for service in the latter ... . The law
of the State of origin (forum law) determines whether or not a document
has to be transmitted abroad for service in the other State [the [Service]
Convention is ‘non-mandatory’ ...];
(2) An address for the person to be served is known[;]
(3) The document to be served is a judicial or extrajudicial document[;]
(4) The document to be served relates to a civil and/or commercial
matter[.] 42
If all these requirements are met, the transmission channels provided for
under the Service Convention must be applied (and the Service Convention
is exclusive), except in case of a derogatory channel.43 In such case, “State
Parties may provide [a] channel[ ] of transmission other than those provided
for under the [Service] Convention[.]” 44 The two types of derogatory
channels are those provided in bilateral or multilateral agreements concluded
between and among Contracting States, and those provided by the domestic
or internal law of the State of destination. 45
39. Malaya & De Dumo-Cornista, supra note 6, at 67.

40. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 1.
41. Id.
42. HCCH, supra note 11, at XLV-XLVI, ¶ 3 (emphases omitted).
43. Id. at XLVI, ¶ 3.
44. Id. at XLVI, ¶ 6.
45. Id.
The Service Convention is applicable to “civil or commercial matters” 46

and it has been recognized that a liberal approach should be taken with respect
to such interpretation, 47 thus —
The Convention is applicable ‘in civil or commercial matters[.]’ The
interpretation of these terms brought on lively discussions, for it was
[recognized] that the accepted meaning could be substantially different as
between one system and another. For some, the concept covered everything
which was not criminal, for others everything which was neither criminal
nor having to do with taxes, for yet others everything which was not a
criminal, tax[,] or administrative matter. Finally, in the Egyptian system of
personal laws matters of personal status are not considered to be civil matters.
There appeared besides very deep differences concerning the determination
of the law applicable to [characterization] of these matters. Some looked to
the system of the requesting States, others to the system of the States
addressed. The authors of the Convention of 1965 had refused to deal with
this question, leaving it to the States Parties to solve it. It appeared that, in
practice, the Central Authorities were very liberal, being ready to serve documents
which they would not be obligated to serve under the terms of the Convention, this for
the purpose of rendering service to the addressee, the only effective barriers being raised
against service in criminal or tax matters. This is why, [realizing] that it would not
be possible for them to recommend a uniform solution acceptable to all the States, the
Experts limited themselves to expressing the wish that the Convention be applied in
the most liberal possible manner in respect of the scope of its subject matter. 48
Several articles allow for a Contracting Party’s declarations or objections
to the applicability of certain provisions, in particular, Articles 8 (2), 10, 15 (2),
and 16 (3) thereof. 49 Significantly, the Philippines has made the following
Declarations with respect to the Service Convention:
(1) In accordance with Article 5 of the Convention, formal service shall be
permissible only if the document to be served is written in or translated
into the English or Filipino language.
(2) Pursuant to Article 8, the Philippines objects to service of judicial
documents directly through diplomatic or consular agents upon persons
in its territory, unless the document is served upon a national of the State
in which the documents originate.

47. Permanent Bureau, Report on the Work of the Special Commission on the Operation of
the Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial
Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, § 1 (A) (Dec. 1977).
48. Id. (emphasis supplied).
49. See Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, arts. 8 (2), 10, 15 (2), & 16 (3).
(3) The Philippines objects to the transmission channels under paragraphs a

and c as provided for in Article 10 of the Convention. 50
1. Main Channel of Transmission

The Service Convention provides for one main channel of transmission where
documents must pass through a Contracting State’s Central Authority and
several alternative channels of transmission, which preserves the applicant’s
option to resort to different modes of service.51
Under the main channel of transmission, an authority or judicial officer
competent in one Contracting Party (referred to as the Forwarding Authority)
transmits a request for service to the Central Authority of the Contracting
Party in which service is to be effected. 52 In this respect, Article 3 of the
Service Convention provides —
The authority or judicial officer competent under the law of the State in
which the documents originate shall forward to the Central Authority of the
State addressed a request conforming to the model annexed to the present
Convention, without any requirement of legali[z]ation or other equivalent
formality.
The document to be served or a copy thereof shall be annexed to the request.
The request and the document shall both be furnished in duplicate. 53
Article 5 of the Service Convention requires each Contracting State to
create a Central Authority to receive requests for service from other
Contracting States, and to attempt to satisfy the requests from abroad for
service upon persons within their territory. 54 The Central Authority of the
50. HCCH, Declaration/Reservation/Notification (Philippines), available at

https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-
table/notifications/?csid=1435&disp=resdn (last accessed July 31, 2021)
[https://perma.cc/RH5D-Q6W6].
51. HCCH, Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial
and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, at 1-2, available at
https://assets.hcch.net/docs/f4ccc07b-55ed-4ea7-8fb9-8a2b28549e1d.pdf (last
accessed July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/YBP7-F79B] [hereinafter HCCH
Outline].
52. Id. See also Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 5.
53. Id. art. 3.
54. Downs, supra note 34, at 130.
Requested State effects service of the document, or causes service thereof, in

the manner stated therein 55 —
The Central Authority of the State addressed shall itself serve the document
or shall arrange to have it served by an appropriate agency, either —
(a) by a method prescribed by its internal law for the service of documents
in domestic actions upon persons who are within its territory, or
(b) by a particular method requested by the applicant, unless such a method
is incompatible with the law of the State addressed.
Subject to sub-paragraph (b) of the first paragraph of this article, the
document may always be served by delivery to an addressee who accepts it
voluntarily.
If the document is to be served under the first paragraph above, the Central
Authority may require the document to be written in, or translated into, the
official language or one of the official languages of the State addressed.
That part of the request, in the form attached to the present Convention,
which contains a summary of the document to be served, shall be served with
the document. 56
In accordance with the treaty provisions of the Service Convention, the
Philippines has declared under Article 5 of the Service Convention that it
requires the document originated from the Requesting State to be served to
be written in, or translated into, the official languages of Filipino or English. 57
The execution of the request for service by the Central Authority under
Article 5 (1) (a) of the Service Convention shall be the method prescribed for
the service of documents in domestic actions upon persons who are within its
territory. 58 Notably, Article 5 (1) (b) of the Service Convention provides that
the applicant (the Forwarding Authority in the Requesting State) may request
that a particular method or procedure be used, to the extent that it is not
incompatible with the law of the Requested State. 59 Lastly, “the authority
executing the request must complete the certificate as annexed to the [Service]

56. Id.
57. HCCH, supra note 50. See PHIL. CONST. art. XIV, § 7 (“For purposes of
communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines are
Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English.”).
59. HCCH Outline, supra note 51, at 1.
Convention, stating that the service was effected, or if not, the reasons that
prevented service[,]” 60 thus —
The Central Authority of the State addressed or any authority which it may
have designated for that purpose, shall complete a certificate in the form of
the model annexed to the present Convention.
The certificate shall state that the document has been served and shall include
the method, the place and the date of service and the person to whom the
document was delivered. If the document has not been served, the certificate
shall set out the reasons which have prevented service.
The applicant may require that a certificate not completed by a Central
Authority or by a judicial authority shall be countersigned by one of these
authorities.
The certificate shall be forwarded directly to the applicant. 61
2. Alternative Channels of Transmission

The Service Convention preserves the freedom of Contracting Parties to use
alternative channels of transmission through diplomatic or consular channels
(direct and indirect), postal channels, direct communication between judicial
officers, officials, or other competent persons of the State of origin and the
State of destination, and direct communication between an interested party
and judicial officers, officials, or other competent persons of the State of
destination. 62 These are provided for under Articles 8, 9, and 10 of the Service
Convention. 63
Diplomatic or consular transmissions under Article 8 and 9 are channels
of transmission where “the request for service is forwarded by the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of the State of origin (forwarding authority) to the consul or
diplomat representing the State of origin within the State of destination.” 64
After, the latter executes the request for service either personally (through
direct channels), or otherwise forwards the same for execution to a competent
authority of the State of destination (through indirect channels). 65
60. Id.
62. HCCH Outline, supra note 51, at 2.
63. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, arts. 8-10. See also HCCH, supra note
51, at 2.
64. HCCH, supra note 11, at LI, ¶ 25.
65. Id.
The Philippines has declared under Article 8 of the Service Convention

that it is opposed to service of judicial documents directly through its
diplomatic or consular agents upon persons in its territory, “unless the
document is to be served upon a national of the State in which the documents
originate.” 66
Article 10 (a) of the Service Convention allows service by postal
channels. 67 The HCCH has expressed the conclusion that the use of private
courier was the “equivalent of the postal channel.” 68 The HCCH has also
noted that using postal channels for service under Article 10 (a) of the Service
Convention is a method quite separate from service via the Central Authorities
or between judicial officers. 69 In effect, the same provision gives Contracting
States the opportunity to consider that service by mail would be considered
an infringement of their sovereignty and thus object to it on those grounds.70
In this respect, the Philippines has objected to the following transmission
channels under Article 10 (a) of the Service Convention. 71
Article 10 (b) allows for channels of transmission “directly through the
judicial officers, officials[,] or other competent persons of the State of
destination[.]” 72 Under this provision, any person interested in the
proceedings (Article 10 (c)) or any judicial officer, official or other competent
person in the State of origin (Article 10 (b)) can directly approach and
communicate with a judicial officer, official, or other competent persons in
the State of destination to serve the documents. 73 Under some jurisdictions,
the provisions provide for “transmission of documents to be served by a huissier
de justice to another huissier de justice.” 74 Notably, the Philippines has objected
to Article 10 (c), 75 which gives “the freedom of any person interested in a
judicial proceeding to effect service of judicial documents directly through the

67. Id. art. 10 (a).
68. Permanent Bureau, Conclusions and Recommendations Adopted by the Special
Commission on the Practical Operation of the Hague Apostille, Evidence and Service
Conventions, ¶ 56 (Oct. 28 - Nov. 4, 2003).
69. HCCH, supra note 11, at XLVII, ¶ 10.
70. Id. at XLIX, ¶ 19.
71. HCCH, supra note 50.
72. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 10 (b).
73. See id. art. 10.
74. HCCH, supra note 11, at LI, ¶ 27.
judicial officers, officials[,] or other competent persons of the State of

destination.” 76
3. Derogatory Channels
The Service Convention allows Contracting Parties to employ derogatory
channels, or channels of transmission other than those provided under the
Service Convention, including those made by special agreements, or as
otherwise provided by their internal law. 77
Article 19 of the Service Convention provides that “[t]o the extent that
the internal law of a contracting State permits methods of transmission, other
than those provided for in the preceding articles, of documents coming from
abroad, for service within its territory, the present Convention shall not affect
such provisions.”78
Under Article 19 of the Service Convention, Contracting Parties are free
to employ any method of service permitted under the internal law of the
Contracting Party where service is made, provided that the method is not
incompatible with the foreign State. 79 Article 19 of the Service Convention
requires the person effecting service to prove that the service is valid under
the internal law of the foreign country. 80 It has been noted, however, that
practically speaking, this would be difficult to affirmatively prove since some
laws in some jurisdictions, particularly in Europe, do not specifically prohibit
methods of foreign service. 81
Under the other derogatory channel, and in general, it is accepted that
Contracting States may employ channels provided for by special agreement. 82
Under Article 11, the Service Convention does “not prevent two or more
contracting States from agreeing to permit, for the purpose of service of
judicial documents, channels of transmission other than those provided in
preceding articles and, in particular, direct communication between [the
contracting States’] respective authorities.” 83 Additionally, supplementary
76. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 10 (c).

77. HCCH, supra note 11, at XLVI, ¶ 6.
79. Id.
81. Id. at 132-33.
82. Permanent Bureau, supra note 47, § 1 (F).
agreements between Parties to the 1905 Civil Procedure Convention 84 and

the Convention of 1 March 1954 on Civil Procedure85 “shall be considered
as equally applicable to the [Service] Convention, unless the Parties have
otherwise agreed.” 86 Lastly, “the [Service] Convention shall not derogate from
Conventions containing provisions on the matters governed by this
Convention to which the contracting States are, or shall become, Parties[,]” 87
without prejudice to the provisions of Articles 22 and 24 thereof. 88
C. Protection of the Defendant

The Service Convention provides protection from default judgment to the
defendant to whom documents of judicial or extrajudicial nature are served. 89
These safeguards are found in Articles 15 and 16 of the Service Convention.
Article 15 states —
Where a writ of summons or an equivalent document had to be transmitted
abroad for the purpose of service, under the provisions of the present
Convention, and the defendant has not appeared, judgment shall not be
given until it is established that —
(a) the document was served by a method prescribed by the internal law
of the State addressed for the service of documents in domestic
actions upon persons who are within its territory, or
(b) the document was actually delivered to the defendant or to his
residence by another method provided for by this Convention,
and that in either of these cases the service or the delivery was effected in
sufficient time to enable the defendant to defend.
Each contracting State shall be free to declare that the judge, notwithstanding
the provisions of the first paragraph of this article, may give judgment even
if no certificate of service or delivery has been received, if all the following
conditions are fulfilled —
(a) the document was transmitted by one of the methods provided for
in this Convention,
84. Convention Relating to Civil Procedure, signed July 17, 1905, 99 B.F.S.P. 990.
85. Convention Relating to Civil Procedure, signed Mar. 1, 1954, 286 U.N.T.S. 265.
87. Id. art. 25.
88. Id.
89. Id. arts. 15 & 16.
(b) a period of time of not less than six months, considered adequate by
the judge in the particular case, has elapsed since the date of the
transmission of the document,
(c) no certificate of any kind has been received, even though every
reasonable effort has been made to obtain it through the competent
authorities of the State addressed.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraphs the judge may
order, in case of urgency, any provisional or protective measures. 90
Article 15 of the Service Convention serves as a protection prior to
judgment, unless it is established that service was effective under the Service
Convention. 91 It is designed to prohibit a party from obtaining an enforceable
default judgment, unless reasonable effort has been made to effect service upon
the defendant, and the defendant has had an opportunity to give his defense. 92
It requires that a defendant must be served either under Philippine procedural
law under Article 15 (a), 93 or receive actual notice under Article 15 (b). 94
Article 16 provides the defendant relief from judgment that has already
been given for the time-bar arising out of the expiry of the period of appeal, 95
thus —
When a writ of summons or an equivalent document had to be transmitted
abroad for the purpose of service, under the provisions of the present
Convention, and a judgment has been entered against a defendant who has
not appeared, the judge shall have the power to relieve the defendant from
the effects of the expiration of the time for appeal from the judgment if the
following conditions are fulfilled —
(a) the defendant, without any fault on his part, did not have
knowledge of the document in sufficient time to defend, or
knowledge of the judgment in sufficient time to appeal, and
(b) the defendant has disclosed a prima facie [defense] to the action on
the merits.
An application for relief may be filed only within a reasonable time after the
defendant has knowledge of the judgment.
90. Id. art. 15.

91. Id.
93. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 15 (a).
94. Id. art. 15 (b).
95. Dela Paz, supra note 17, at 68.
Each contracting State may declare that the application will not be
entertained if it is filed after the expiration of a time to be stated in the
declaration, but which shall in no case be less than one year following the
date of the judgment.
This article shall not apply to judgments concerning status or capacity of
persons. 96
Notably, the 2016 Practical Handbook on the Operation of the Service
Convention states of Article 16 —
Article 16 does not impose an obligation on the forum judge to relieve the
defendant from the relevant time-bar. It merely establishes a power to do so,
and the forum judge has a broad discretion in exercising that power.
Moreover, Article 16 does not give the court a power to allow an appeal
from (or to set aside) a judgment given in default, or allow the defendant an
opportunity to appeal from (or apply to set aside the default judgment); these
remain matters for the law of the forum court, which may well afford the
defendant with other opportunities to appeal from the judgment. 97
III. APPLICATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION ON THE SERVICE OF

JUDICIAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL DOCUMENTS IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL
MATTERS
A. Overview of the Supreme Court Guidelines on the Implementation in the

Philippines of the Service Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial
Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters
The Supreme Court’s Guidelines on the Implementation in the Philippines of
the Hague Service Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial Documents
in Civil and Commercial Matters (Guidelines), 98 which took effect on 1
October 2020, 99 governs the operation and implementation of the Service
Convention in the Philippines, insofar as they concern judicial documents in
civil or commercial matters. 100 These Guidelines are to be “interpreted with
the end in view of expeditiously granting requests for transmission or service

97. HCCH, supra note 11, at 105, ¶ 328.
98. Supreme Court, Guidelines on the Implementation in the Philippines of the
Hague Service Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial Documents in Civil
and Commercial Matters, Administrative Order No. 251-2020 [SC A.O. No.
251-2020] (Sept. 11, 2020).
99. Id. ¶ V, (1).
100. Id. ¶ I, (1).
abroad of judicial documents[;] however, [w]here applicable, the provisions of

the Rules of Court, as amended, and other pertinent laws and rules, shall apply
suppletorily[.]” 101
While requests for service of judicial documents are governed by the
Supreme Court’s Guidelines, requests for service of extrajudicial documents
should be directly transmitted to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). 102
The objectives of the Service Convention as stated by the Guidelines are
the following:
(a) To establish a system which, to the extent possible, brings actual
notice of the document to be served to the recipient in sufficient
time;
(b) To simplify the method of transmission of these documents from
the requesting State to the requested State; and
(c) To facilitate proof that service has been effective abroad, by means
of certificates contained in a uniform model. 103
The Guidelines provide that the Service Convention shall apply in the
Philippines, provided the following conditions are present:
(a) A document is to be transmitted from one State Party for service to
another State Party;
(b) The address of the intended recipient in the receiving State Party is
known;
(c) The document to be served is a judicial document; and
(d) The document to be served relates to a civil or commercial
matter. 104
The Central Authority may object to, and decline the request for service,
if such Request does not comply with the provisions of the Service
Convention, or when compliance with the request would infringe upon its
101. Id. ¶ I, (5).

102. Office of the Court Administrator, Requests for Service of Judicial Documents
in the Philippines from Other State Parties (Inbound Requests), at 1, available at
https://oca.judiciary.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Inbound-
Request.pdf (last accessed July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/L8WZ-DYU2].
103. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (4) (citing HCCH, PRACTICAL HANDBOOK ON THE
OPERATION OF THE HAGUE SERVICE CONVENTION (3d ed. 2006) [hereinafter
PRACTICAL HANDBOOK 2006]).
104. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (2).
sovereignty or security. 105 Notably, Article 4 of the Service Convention

provides that in cases where the Central Authority considers that the request
does not comply with the provisions of the Service Convention, it shall
promptly inform the applicant and specify its objections to the request. 106
The Guidelines are aligned with the Service Convention and define
certain terms therein.
‘Service’ refers to the transmission and formal delivery of documents that is
legally sufficient to charge the defendant with notice of a pending action;
Provided, that it shall not be interpreted to comprise substantive rules relating
to the actual service of process, nor shall it determine the conditions or
formalities of that service[.]
[The] ‘Central Authority’ refers to the receiving authority in charge of
receiving requests for service from Requesting States and executing them or
causing them to be executed. 107
Notably, Article 2 of the Service Convention provides that the Central
Authority “will undertake to receive requests for service coming from other
contracting States and to proceed in conformity with the provisions of articles
3 to 6.” 108 Further, the Contracting State shall organize the Central Authority
in conformity with its own law. 109 The Office of the Court Administrator
(OCA) is the Central Authority designated for the Philippines for judicial
documents. 110
The “‘Forwarding Authority’ refers to the authority or judicial officer of
the Requesting State competent to forward the request for service” 111 to the
Central Authority of the Requested State. 112 “All Justices and Clerks of Court
of collegiate courts, and Judges of lower courts are designated as Forwarding
Authorities in the Philippines.” 113 Article 3 of the Service Convention relates
105. Id. ¶ I (3) (citing Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 13).
107. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (5) (b) & (c) (citing PRACTICAL HANDBOOK 2006,
paras. 46 & 83).
109. Id.
110. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (5) (c).
111. Id. ¶ I (5) (d) (citing Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 3) (emphases
omitted).
112. Id.
113. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (5) (d).
the provision on forwarding authorities, and defines them as the “authority or

judicial officer competent under the law of the State in which the documents
originate[, who] shall forward to the Central Authority of the State addressed
a request conforming to the model annexed to the present Convention,
without any requirement of [legalization] or other equivalent formality.” 114
“Competent Authority” refers to “the authority in Article 6 [of the
Service] Convention [which], in addition to the Central Authority, [is]
designated to complete the Certificate in accordance with the Model Form
annexed to the Service Convention.” 115 All judges are designated as
Competent Authorities who are authorized to complete the Certificate in
accordance with the Model Form annexed to the Service Convention in the
Philippines. 116
[A] ‘Judicial Document’ refers to orders, resolutions, judgments, and other
official documents issued by courts in relation to civil or commercial
proceedings, as well as pleadings and other court submissions by parties to
such civil or commercial proceedings.
[An] ‘Extrajudicial Document’ refers to any private or public document not
directly connected with pending or terminated lawsuits before courts. These
shall include, but not limited to, demands for payment, notices to quit in
connection with leaseholds, and protests in connection with bills of
exchange[.] 117
The “Model Form” refers to the form annexed to the Service
Convention, which consists of three parts:
(1) Request for service, which is sent to the Central Authority of the
Requested State seeking assistance in the service of documents,
(2) Certificate, which confirms whether or not the documents have been
served, and
(3) Summary of the Document to be Served, which is delivered to the addressee
and preceded by a Warning relating to the legal nature, purpose[,] and
effects of the document to be served. 118

115. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (5) (e) (citing Hague Service Convention, supra note
2, art. 6).
116. Id.
117. Id. ¶ I (5) (f) & (g) (citing Permanent Bureau, supra note 47, § 1 (E).
118. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ I (5) (h).
The Model Form is annexed to the Service Convention, as well as the

Guidelines for Filling up the Model Form, form Annexes A and B of the
Guidelines, and are likewise accessible from the HCCH and OCA websites. 119
The Guidelines provide the step-by-step process for Requests for Service
Abroad of Judicial Documents, depending on whether they are Outbound
Requests or Inbound Requests for service. Similarly, the OCA has included
information regarding Inbound and Outbound Requests in its website.120
1. Outbound Requests for Service

Requests for extraterritorial service of judicial documents from the Philippines
to other State Parties, or Outbound Requests for Service, are made by
application of a party in a civil or commercial proceeding, upon motion for
leave of court accompanied by the following documents in duplicate:121
(a) A copy of the Model Form, including the Request, Certificate,
Summary of Documents to be Served, and Warning;
(b) The original documents to be served or certified true copies thereof,
including all annexes;
(c) Certified translations of the Model Form and all accompanying
documents, where necessary;
(d) An undertaking to pay in full any fees associated with the service of the
documents; and
(e) Any other requirements of the Requested State, taking into account its
reservations, declarations[,] and notifications, which may be found in the
HCCH website. 122
Under the Guidelines, a party seeking leave from court to effect
extraterritorial service of judicial documents must take into account the
particular requirements of the Requested State. 123 The reservations,
declarations, notifications, or depositary communications, as well as the
designation of authorities for each Contracting State are tabulated, and easily
119. Id.
120. Office of the Court Administrator, Hague Service Convention, available at
https://oca.judiciary.gov.ph/hague-service-convention (last accessed July 31,
2021) [https://perma.cc/B8LW-F8XU].
121. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ II (1).
122. Id. (citing HCCH, supra note 36).
123. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ II (2).
accessible at the HCCH website. 124 Notably, the 2019 Amendments to the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (2019 Rules) 125 also requires that any
application to the court for leave to effect service of summons under Rule 14
(Summons) in any manner for which leave is necessary “shall be made by
motion in writing, [and] supported by an affidavit of the plaintiff or some
person on his behalf, setting forth the grounds for the application.” 126
Additionally, HCCH Guidelines for Completing the Model Form instructs
that the Model Form is to be completed electronically using a word processor,
and with the use of plain, understandable language which avoids unnecessary
legal or technical language. 127
Upon the party’s motion for leave of court, “the court shall determine
whether extraterritorial service through the [ ] Service Convention is
necessary, in accordance with Rules 13 and 14 of the Rules of Court, as
amended.” 128
If the court finds that extraterritorial service under the Hague Service
Convention is warranted, it shall issue an Order to that effect[, which] shall
include a directive to the requesting party to procure and submit a prepaid
courier pouch which shall be used for the transmission of documents from
the court to the Central Authority of the Requested State.
The Judge, in the case of lower courts, or the Justice or the Clerk of Court,
in the case of collegiate courts, as forwarding authorities, shall accomplish
and sign the Request using the Model Form, check the completeness of
documents, and ensure compliance with the requirements of the Service
Convention and that of the Requested State.
When the request for service entails costs and fees, the party, in accordance
with his [or] her undertaking, shall settle the payment and submit the
required proof of payment to the clerk of court.
Any assessment after the execution, including any deficiency assessment, shall
still be paid by the party at the appropriate time. Proof of payment of the
costs and fees shall be immediately sent to the clerk of court where the case
is pending.

125. 2019 AMENDMENTS TO THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.
126. Id. rule 14, § 19.
127. HCCH, Guidelines for Completing the Model Form, at 1, available at
https://assets.hcch.net/docs/1e4b0a96-9e87-4b10-99c8-8647c843b80e.pdf (last
accessed July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/HR4V-S7YE].
128. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ II (1).
Failure to settle the fees in full, whenever necessary, shall be a ground for
direct contempt of court, in addition to any other sanction that the judge
may impose in accordance with the Rules of Court, as amended.
Once all the requirements are submitted by the party requesting the
extraterritorial service through the Hague Service Convention, the court
shall coordinate with the Central Authority of the Requested State and
transmit the following:
(a) The Order granting the extraterritorial service;
(b) The filled-out Request and Summary of Document to be Served
with Warning
(c) The blank Certificate (to be completed by the Central Authority of
the Requested State);
(d) The documents sought to be served; and
(e) Certified translations of the Model Form and all accompanying
documents, where necessary[.]
The court shall also furnish the OCA with a copy of the request and shall
update the OCA on the status of its request. 129
After transmission of the documents abroad —
[t]he Central Authority of the Requested State shall then process the request
and attempt service in accordance with its domestic laws. It shall thereafter
provide formal confirmation whether the service was successful or
unsuccessful, using the Certificate annexed to the Hague Service
Convention. The completed Certificate shall thereafter be transmitted back
to the requesting [or forwarding] court, and shall form part of the records of
the case. 130
2. Inbound Requests for Service

The Guidelines likewise govern inbound requests, or requests for service of
judicial documents in the Philippines from abroad. Requests for service of
documents from other State Parties, or inbound requests for service of judicial
documents originating from other State Parties shall be referred to the OCA,
as the Central Authority. 131 The requirements are:
(a) The documents sought to be served are judicial;
(b) The Request conforms to the Model Form;
(c) The document sought to be served is attached to the Request;
129. Id. ¶ II (2), (3), & (4).

130. Id. ¶ II (7).
131. Id. ¶ I (5) (c) & ¶ III (1).
(d) The Request and its attachments are accomplished/translated in English

or Filipino;
(e) The Request and its attachment/s are filed in duplicate; and
(f) The address of the intended recipient is indicated with sufficient
specificity. As much as practicable, it shall include the house number,
building, street name, barangay, municipality/city, province, and zip
code. Post office boxes shall not be allowed. 132
As to payment of costs —
All requests must be accompanied by payment of One Hundred U.S. Dollars
(U.S. $100.00) for costs of service for each recipient to be served. For
multiple recipients residing in the same address, only one fee shall be paid.
Should cost for the service of document exceed the said amount, the OCA
shall send an updated Statement of Cost to the Forwarding Authority of the
Requesting State for payment. Payment methods shall be posted on the OCA
website and official receipts shall be issued upon verification of payment and
a copy shall be sent to the applicant immediately. 133
The OCA website details the payment method for service of documents
to be made through bank deposit or transfer to the Land Bank of the
Philippines. 134
Upon transmission of the request,
[t]he Forwarding Authority of the Requesting State from which the
documents originated shall transmit the request, together with all the
documents, including proof of payment, to the OCA through any of the
following modes:
(1) Electronic transmission - via email to:
PHCA-Service@judiciary.gov.ph
(2) Physical transmission - via registered mail or courier services
to:
Central Authority[,] Office of the Court Administrator[,] Supreme Court
of the Philippines[,] Third Floor, Old Supreme Court Building[,] Padre
Faura Street, Ermita, Manila 1000 Philippines. 135
132. Id. ¶ III (2).

133. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ III (3).
134. Office of the Court Administrator, supra note 102, at 1.
135. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ III (4).
Should the request, upon evaluation of the OCA, fail[ ] to comply with any
of the [ ] requirements [under the Guidelines], or [if] there are objections for
the execution of the request, the OCA shall inform the Forwarding
Authority, specifying the objection/s thereto. If the objections are resolved,
the processing of the request shall proceed[; otherwise,] the request shall be
denied, and all documents relating thereto shall be returned to the
Forwarding Authority, along with a notice of objection or denial, stating the
reasons therefor. 136
When the Inbound Request is sufficient in form,
the OCA shall forward the request to the [Executive Judge or Presiding
Judge of] the court having jurisdiction over the area where the intended
recipient resides. Requests sent via e[-]mail shall be transmitted to the official
e-mail accounts of the court concerned.
The Executive Judge in multiple-sala courts, or the Presiding Judge in single-
sala courts, shall immediately assign a sheriff, process server, or any other
competent personnel to serve the document in accordance with the Rules
of Court. Requests transmitted via e[-]mail shall be printed by the court
concerned. The judge shall ensure that service is done in accordance with
these Guidelines and the Rules of Court.
The officer assigned to serve the document shall execute a return on the
service in accordance with the Rules of Court, and submit the same to the
judge of the court who directed the service of the document within five (5)
days from service. The return shall state that the document and attachment/s
have been served, and shall include the method, the place and the date of
service, and the person to whom the document was delivered.
If the document was not delivered successfully, the return shall state the
reasons which prevented the successful service. The officer assigned shall
deliver the unserved document to the court, so that it may later be returned
to the Forwarding Authority. 137
The Judge, as a Competent Authority, “shall immediately accomplish and sign
the Certificate, following the Model Form annexed to the [ ] Service
Convention. In cases of unsuccessful service, the documents sought to be
served shall be attached to the Certificate.” 138
Within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt of the request, the judge shall
transmit the duly-accomplished Certificate and the Return of Service to the
Forwarding Authority of the Requesting State. These shall be accompanied
136. Id. ¶ III (5).

137. Id. ¶ III (6), (7), & (8).
138. Id. ¶ III (9).
by a copy of the documents served, in cases of successful service, or the

original documents, in cases of unsuccessful service. The judge shall furnish
the OCA with a copy of all the documents transmitted, for monitoring
purposes. Should compliance exceed thirty (30) calendar days, the judge shall
also submit an explanation to the OCA for the delay.
...
Expenses that may be incurred in the service of judicial documents for
inbound requests shall be advanced by the concerned Judge, subject to
reimbursement.
The request for reimbursement, together with the supporting documents,
shall be submitted to the OCA and processed accordingly, and charged
against the Service Convention Fund. 139
B. Operation of the Service Convention Under the 2019 Revised Rules of Civil
Procedure
Under the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, 140 extraterritorial service of
summons as against a defendant non-resident who is not found in the country,
in actions in rem or quasi in-rem, could be effected under any of three modes
of service:
(1) by personal service out of the country, with leave of court;
(2) by publication and sending a copy of the summons and order of the
court by registered mail to the defendant’s last known address, also with
leave of court; or
(3) by any other means the judge may consider sufficient. 141
In a case, a trial court’s prescribed mode of extraterritorial service —
by way of publication in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for
three (3) consecutive weeks, at the same time, furnishing respondent copy of
this Order as well as the corresponding Summons and copy of the petition
at her given address at ... California, U.S.A., thru the Department of Foreign
Affairs, 142
139. Id. ¶ ¶ III (10), IV (1), & V (2).

140. 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.
141. Romualdez-Licaros v. Licaros, G.R. No. 150656, 401 SCRA 762, 771 (2003)
(emphasis omitted).
142. Id.
has been considered a valid mode of service as “any other means the judge
may consider efficient.” 143
Under the 2019 Rules and the Supreme Court Guidelines on the Service
Convention, international conventions such as the Service Convention have
been well incorporated into the procedural law.
1. Outbound Requests for Service of Judicial Documents

Rule 13 of the 2019 Rules and the Supreme Court Guidelines on the Service
Convention governs the rule on the service of pleadings, motions, and other
court submissions, unless a different mode of service is prescribed, 144 while
Rule 14 governs the rule on summons. 145 Under the 2019 Rules, service is
the “act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or any other court
submission.” 146 Under the Guidelines, the court shall determine whether
extraterritorial service through the Service Convention is necessary in
accordance with Rules 13 and 14 of the Rules of Court, as amended. 147
Rule 14, Section 17 of the 2019 Rules provides the rule on the
extraterritorial service for defendants who do not reside, and who are not
found in the Philippines, where the action involves in rem or quasi in rem
proceedings. 148
Section 17. Extraterritorial service. — When the defendant does not reside and
is not found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal status of
the plaintiff or relates to, or the subject of which is, property within the
Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a lien or interest, actual or
contingent, or in which the relief demanded consists, wholly or in part, in
excluding the defendant from any interest therein, or the property of the
defendant has been attached within the Philippines, service may, by leave of
court, be effected out of the Philippines by personal service as under Section
6; or as provided for in international conventions to which the Philippines is a party;
or by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such places and for
such time as the court may order, in which case a copy of the summons and
order of the court shall be sent by registered mail to the last known address
of the defendant, or in any other manner the court may deem sufficient. Any
order granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which shall not be
143. Id.
144. 2019 AMENDMENTS TO THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, rule 13, § 1.
145. Id. rule 14.
146. Id. rule 13, § 2.
147. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ II (1).
148. 2019 AMENDMENTS TO THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, rule 14, § 17.
less than [60] calendar days after notice, within which the defendant must
answer. 149
Among the modes of extraterritorial service provided therein, the 2019
Rules recognize service “as provided for in international conventions to which
the Philippines is a party.” 150 Service may, by leave of court, be also effected
out of the Philippines as under Section 17, as against a defendant who
ordinarily resides within the Philippines, but who is temporarily out of it. 151
Extraterritorial service may also be effected as against a foreign juridical
entity that is not registered in the Philippines, or has no resident agent, but has
transacted or is doing business in it, as defined by law. 152
Section 14. Service upon foreign private juridical entities. — When the defendant
is a foreign private juridical entity which has transacted or is doing business
in the Philippines, as defined by law, service may be made on its resident
agent designated in accordance with law for that purpose, or, if there be no
such agent, on the government official designated by law to that effect, or
on any of its officers, agents, directors or trustees within the Philippines.
If the foreign private juridical entity is not registered in the Philippines, or
has no resident agent but has transacted or is doing business in it, as defined
by law, such service may, with leave of court, be effected outside of the
Philippines through any of the following means:
(a) By personal service coursed through the appropriate court in the
foreign country with the assistance of the [D]epartment of [F]oreign
[A]ffairs;
(b) By publication once in a newspaper of general circulation in the
country where the defendant may be found and by serving a copy
of the summons and the court order by registered mail at the last
known address of the defendant;
(c) By facsimile;
(d) By electronic means with the prescribed proof of service; or
(e) By such other means as the court, in its discretion, may direct. 153

150. Id.
151. Id. rule 14, § 18.
152. Id. rule 14, § 14.
153. Id.
In Luzon Iron Development Group Corp. v. Bridestone Mining and Development

Corp., 154 the Court had the occasion to expound on the principle that foreign
private juridical entities not registered or without a resident agent may be
served —
The petitioners are mistaken in arguing that it cannot be served summons
because under Section 15, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court, extrajudicial
service of summons may be resorted to only when the action is in rem or
quasi in rem and not when the action is in personam. The premise of the
petitioners is erroneous as the rule on extraterritorial service of summons
provided in Section 15, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court is a specific provision
dealing precisely with the service of summons on a defendant which does
not reside and is not found in the Philippines. On the other hand, Section
12, Rule 14 thereof, specifically applies to a defendant foreign private
juridical entity which had transacted business in the Philippines. Both rules
may provide for similar modes of service of summons, nevertheless, they
should only be applied in particular cases, with one applicable to defendants
which do not reside and are not found in the Philippines and the other to
foreign private juridical entities which had transacted business in the
Philippines.
In the case at bench, it is crystal clear that Consolidated Iron transacted
business in the Philippines as it was a signatory in the TPAA that was
executed in Makati. Hence, as the respondents argued, it may be served with
the summons in accordance with the modes provided under Section 12, Rule
14 of the Rules of Court. 155
The premise that a foreign corporation may be served with summons is
by reason of its transacting business in the country without a license, which
allows it to be sued or proceeded against in the Philippines. 156
2. Inbound Requests for Service of Judicial Documents

The Service Convention provides that Inbound Requests for service of
judicial documents may be formally served by the method prescribed by the
154. Luzon Iron Development Group Corporation v. Bridestone Mining and

Development Corporation, G.R. No. 220546, 813 SCRA 583 (2016).
155. Id. at 599 (citing NM Rothschild & Sons (Australia) Limited v. Lepanto
Consolidated Mining Company, G.R. No. 175799, 661 SCRA 328, 343 (2011)).
156. An Act Providing for the Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines [REV.
CORP. CODE], Republic Act No. 11232, § 150 (2019).
Contracting State’s internal law for the service of documents in domestic

actions upon persons who are within its territory. 157
Under the Guidelines, inbound requests for service of judicial documents
sufficient in form are forwarded by the OCA to the court having jurisdiction
over the area where the intended recipient resides. 158 Upon transmittal of the
documents,
the Executive Judge in multiple-sala courts, or the Presiding Judge in single-
sala courts, shall immediately assign a sheriff, process server, or any other
competent personnel to serve the document in accordance with the Rules
of Court. ... [Further, the] judge shall ensure that service is done in
accordance with these Guidelines and the Rules of Court.
[Thereafter, the] officer assigned to serve the document shall execute a return
on the service in accordance with the Rules of Court, and submit the same
to the judge of the court who directed the service of the document within
five (5) days from service. The return shall state that the document and
attachment/s have been served, and shall include the method, the place and
the date of service, and the person to whom the document was delivered.
If the document was not delivered successfully, the return shall state the
reasons which prevented the successful service. The officer assigned shall
deliver the unserved document to the court, so that it may later be returned
to the Forwarding Authority [of the Requesting State]. 159
157. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 5 (a).

158. SC A.O. No. 251-2020, ¶ III (6).
159. Id. ¶ III (7) & (8). See also 2019 AMENDMENTS TO THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE, rule 14, § 20.
Section 20. Return. — Within thirty (30) calendar days from issuance
of summons by the clerk of court and receipt thereof, the sheriff or
process server, or person authorized by the court, shall complete its
service. Within five (5) calendar days from service of summons, the
server shall file with the court and serve a copy of the return to the
plaintiff’s counsel, personally, by registered mail, or by electronic means
authorized by the Rules.
Should substituted service have been effected, the return shall state the
following:
(1) The impossibility of prompt personal service within a period of
thirty (30) calendar days from issue and receipt of summons;
Pertinently, Rule 13, Section 5 states the modes of service under the Rules
of Civil Procedure, thus —
Section 5. Modes of Service. — Pleadings, motions, notices, orders,
judgments, and other court submissions shall be served personally or by
registered mail, accredited courier, electronic mail, facsimile transmission,
other electronic means as may be authorized by the Court, or as provided for
in international conventions to which the Philippines is a party. 160
Considering that the 2019 Rules include in the modes of service those
provided for in international conventions to which it is a party, 161 service using
the channels of transmission under the Service Convention are included.
IV. DEVELOPING AND EMERGING ISSUES ON THE OPERATION AND

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION
The Author notes some of the developments, as well as the emerging issues
and trends, which have arisen in the operation and implementation of the
Service Convention. Although by no means an exhaustive list, this Article
frames some of the recent and developing issues that have been encountered
by Contracting States in implementing the Service Convention, which legal
practitioners may find relevant to the Philippine setting.
A. On the Mandatory Nature of the Service Convention

Article 1 provides that the Service Convention applies in “all cases, in civil or
commercial matters, where there is occasion to transmit a judicial or
extrajudicial documents for service abroad.”162 Article 1 also limits application
(2) The date and time of the three (3) attempts on at least (2) two
different dates to cause personal service and the details of the
inquiries made to locate the defendant residing thereat; and
(3) The name of the person at least eighteen (18) years of age and of
sufficient discretion residing thereat, name of competent person in
charge of the defendant’s office or regular place of business, or name
of the officer of the homeowners’ association or condominium
corporation or its chief security officer in charge of the community
or building where the defendant may be found.
Id.
160. Id. rule 13, § 5 (emphasis supplied).
161. Id.
of the Service Convention to where the address of the person to be served is

not known. 163
Despite there being no obligation to provide assistance in locating the
person to be served, Contracting States have in practice employed a variety of
measures to assist requests for service where the address is incomplete or
incorrect, or even when the address is unknown.164 A bigger issue to the
question of the Service Convention’s application lies in the interpretation of
courts of different jurisdictions as to the meaning of the first paragraph of
Article 1, which grants to the Contracting State application of the Service
Convention in all civil and commercial cases, where there is occasion to
transmit a document for service abroad. 165 While there is no doubt that the
prevailing interpretation presumes that the internal law of the forum
determines whether there is “occasion ... for service abroad,” 166 the problem
of ambiguity can be framed in the matter concerning service to a purported
agent of the person to be served within the borders of the forum State. In the
Report of the Special Commission of April 1989 on the Operation of the
Service Convention 167 —
This question was posed as indicated in the Checklist by two cases decided
by[ ] the highest courts in two different countries involving service upon the
purported agent of a foreign incorporated company within the territory of
the respective country: Schlunk v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, decided by the
Supreme Court of the United States, 15 June 1988 and Segers and Rufa BV v.
Mabanaft GmbH, decided by the Hoge Raad of the Netherlands on 27 June
1986. The Schlunk case involved service upon a wholly owned domestic
subsidiary of the foreign company which was deemed to be an agent to
receive service of process on behalf of the parent company, even though it
had not been expressly so designated. The Mabanaft case involved the
question of whether procedural rules adopted by the Netherlands to make a
163. Id.
164. HCCH, Conclusions and Recommendations of the Special Commission on the
Practical Operation of the Hague Service, Evidence and Access to Justice
Conventions (20–23 May 2014), ¶ 23, available at
https://assets.hcch.net/docs/eb709b9a-5692-4cc8-a660-e406bc6075c2.pdf (last
accessed July 31, 2021) [https://perma.cc/BZB5-4GX2].
166. Id. & Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, 486 U.S. 694, 699 (1988).
167. Permanent Bureau, Report on the Work of the Special Commission of April 1989 on
the Operation of the Hague Conventions of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of
Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters and of 18 March
1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (Apr. 1989).
lawyer a continuing agent for his client who had elected domicile at his office
to receive service of process in later (appellate) stages of a legal proceedings
were intended to apply when the person to be served resided abroad, thus
rendering the Convention inapplicable to notice of appeal to the
intermediate appellate court or the Hoge Raad. The courts in both cases had
started from the assumption that it was for the court before which the
proceeding was pending to decide whether there was ‘occasion’ to transmit
documents abroad for service. 168
In the Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk case, 169 the petitioner, a
foreign company, challenged the respondent’s attempt to serve process on the
former by serving its wholly owned United States subsidiary in accordance
with state rules instead of pursuant to the procedures in the Service
Convention. 170 The Circuit Court found that under Illinois state law, the
relationship between the parent and subsidiary constituted the latter as the
former’s involuntary agent for service of process; hence, service could be
perfected entirely within the U.S., and the court held it was not necessary to
follow the method of procedure under the Service Convention. 171 In holding
that the service was validly made upon the foreign company, the U.S.
Supreme Court affirmed and held that the Service Convention is “mandatory”
and preempts inconsistent state law methods of service in all cases in which it
is applicable, 172 however, the forum’s internal law determines whether a
process is for service abroad, thus —
[T]here is no comparable evidence in the negotiating history that the
Convention was meant to apply to substituted service on a subsidiary like
VWoA, which clearly does not require service abroad under the forum’s
internal law. Hence neither the language of the Convention nor the
negotiating history contradicts our interpretation of the Convention,
according to which the internal law of the forum is presumed to determine
whether there is occasion for service abroad. 173
In the case of Segers and Rufa BV v. Mabanaft GmbH, 174 the plaintiffs issued
notice by summons of their appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeals at
168. Id. ¶ 12.

169. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, 486 U.S. 694 (1988).
170. Id. at 697.
171. Id.
172. Id. at 699.
173. Id. at 704.
174. The Netherlands: Supreme Court Decision in Segers and Rufa BV v. Mabanaft Gmbh,
28 I.L.M. 1584 (1989).
the Hague, and the summons was served with the defendant Mabanaft
GmbH’s attorney at the Hague. 175 When Mabanaft did not appear, the
plaintiffs sought entry of default judgment against Mabanaft. 176 The issue in
the case is whether the plaintiffs must first show compliance with Article 15
of the Service Convention. 177 The Supreme Court of Netherlands rules that
the Service Convention in this case was applicable, and that the internal law
on the rules relating to the service of summons in civil cases, does not stand in
the way of the fact that a notice of appeal to the appellate court of the Supreme
Court (Hoge Raad), when such document is intended for the defendant whose
domicile or habitual residence is in one of the Contracting States, should be
considered as one document for which there is occasion to transmit for service
abroad, within the meaning of Article 15. 178 Hence, judgment cannot be
entered on default of appearance against the non-appearing defendant as long
as it has not become apparent that the requirements under Article 15 of the
Service Convention have been met. 179
Although the principle generally remains that it is the forum that decides
the applicability of the Service Convention under its own law, there is a
danger as in some cases where a person not expressly designated as an agent to
receive service of process may constitute valid service under the law of the
forum State. In such case, refusal of the court to apply the provisions of the
Service Convention may harm the efficacy of the Service Convention,
Further, conflicting rulings as determined by different interpretations of the
courts may also tend to more variation, rather than uniformity, in the
international service of process.
B. Application of the Service Convention in Arbitration Proceedings

There are several recent issues that have surfaced regarding the applicability of
the Service Convention to arbitration. In a recent U.S. judgment rendered by
the California Supreme Court, Rockefeller Technology Investments (Asia) VII v.
Changzhou SinoType Technology Co., Ltd., 180 the U.S. court has allowed service
of a petition to confirm an arbitral award by agreement of the parties, and
175. Id. ¶ 1.
176. Id.
177. Id. ¶ 2.2.
178. Id. ¶ 2.5.
179. Id.
180. Rockefeller Technology Investments (Asia) VII v. Changzhou SinoType
Technology Co., Ltd., 9 Cal.5th 125 (2020) (U.S.).
service of process was made through Federal Express, it ruled that the
agreement of the parties constituted a waiver of formal service of process under
California law, in favor of the agreed-upon method of notification. 181
In the case, the parties signed a memorandum of understanding stating
their intent to form a new company, and which contained a provision that the
parties shall provide notice to each other via Federal Express (FedEx) or similar
courier and consented to service of process in accord with the notice
provisions thereof. 182 The plaintiff, Rockefeller, filed a demand for arbitration
in Los Angeles, and the defendant, SinoType, did not appear. 183 After hearing
Rockefeller’s evidence, the arbitrator issued an award in its favor, and
Rockefeller thereafter filed a petition to confirm the award in the California
state court. 184 It sent a copy of the summons to SinoType via Federal Express
at the address listed in the parties’ agreement. 185 Although SinoType received
the Federal Express envelope in China, the defendant did not appear again at
the hearing in California, and the state court confirmed the arbitral award. 186
Thereafter, the defendant sought to set aside the judgment on account of
invalid service. 187 SinoType argued that the Service Convention does not
permit Chinese nationals to be served via Federal Express considering China
has objected to Article 10 which precludes service through postal channels or
through Federal Express; hence, the failure to comply with the Service
Convention rendered judgment confirming the arbitration award void.188
Although the California Court of Appeals ruled in favor of SinoType, the
California Supreme Court reversed the decision. 189 It ruled that under the
civil procedure law of California, a petition to confirm, correct, or vacate an
arbitral award shall be served in the manner provided for in the arbitration
agreement. 190 In such case, the parties may agree to waive the formal service
181. Id. at 138.

182. Id. at 133.
183. Id.
184. Id. at 134.
185. Id.
186. Rockefeller, 9 Cal.5th at 134.
187. Id.
188. Id.
189. Id. at 146.
190. Id. at 142.
requirement under California law in favor of notification by a method chosen

by the parties; hence, the Service Convention did not apply. 191
In some cases, the relationship between the Service Convention and the
1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) 192 has been considered. 193 A Greek
court has ruled that the formality of the Service Convention cannot be
reconciled with the flexibility of the New York Convention, and ruled the
latter applicable, taking precedence as a special set of rules governing
arbitration. 194
On the other hand, the Service Convention applies to “civil or
commercial matters,” 195 and courts have considered the applicability of
arbitration documents to the Service Convention in another light, i.e., as not
falling within matters civil or commercial; 196 thus, the following argument
should be considered —
Whether the Hague Service Convention applies to arbitration documents
has been considered by the Japanese, Chinese[,] and Russian authorities, and
answered in the affirmative by the Lithuanian authorities. Some arbitration
rules go so far as to waive application of the Hague Service Convention,
although such a waiver [—] even considering that the convention applies to
arbitration [—] would be invalid in the vast majority of jurisdictions.
Nevertheless, the Hague Service Convention text is not supportive of its
application to arbitration. The convention applies in cases of ‘civil or
commercial matters’ (as per Article 1). This term, although interpreted in a broad,
liberal[,] and autonomous manner, relates to the nature and subject matter of the causes
of action, and not to the documents falling under its scope. Such documents are either
judicial or extrajudicial. While judicial documents require the involvement of a state
court, which obviously cannot include arbitration (except for marginal cases, such as
when a court appoints or replaces an arbitrator), extrajudicial documents (in which
arbitration documents could seemingly fit) should emanate from ‘authorities or judicial
191. Id. at 144.

192. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards,
signed June 7, 1959, 330 U.N.T.S. 3 (1958).
193. Antonios D. Tsavdaridis, Hague Service Convention Does Not Apply to
Arbitration Documents, at 1, available at https://rokas.com/wp-
content/uploads/2021/04/Hague-Service-Convention-Does-not-Apply-to-
Arbitration-Documents.pdf (last accessed July 31, 2021)
[https://perma.cc/DZX9-JKLT].
194. Id.
196. Tsavdaridis, supra note 193, at 2.
officers’ (as per Article 17 of the convention). However, arbitrators, tribunal secretaries,
arbitral institutions[,] or parties to an arbitration can hardly be considered as
‘authorities or judicial officers[ ].’ 197
The Author opines that parties under the Philippine jurisdiction will not
likely be allowed to waive the applicability of the Service Convention by
agreement of the parties, as the Service Convention forms part of Philippine
law under Article 2, Section 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. 198 The
Author further opines that the Service Convention may not likely find
application in arbitration proceedings. It should be noted that the Supreme
Court’s A.M. No. 07-11-08-SC, or the Special Rules of Court on Alternative
Dispute Resolution (Special ADR Rules) 199 governs the procedure to be
followed by the courts whenever judicial intervention is sought in arbitration
proceedings, in the specific cases allowed. 200 Additionally, the Court has been
emphatic that resorting to the Rules of Court even in a suppletory capacity is
not allowed under the Special ADR Rules. 201 On that note, the Author notes
that the Service Convention should give way to the rules and interpretations
of the specific rule or law applicable to the matter, such as in the case where
the Special ADR Rules or the New York Convention applies to the
transmission of arbitration documents.
C. Transmission of Documents via Postal Channels, E-mail, and Social Media

The structure of the alternative channels of transmission in the Service
Convention 202 are broadly worded and accommodates for the varied methods
of service in different jurisdictions. In particular, the method of serving
documents by postal channels saves considerable time and money; however,
the meaning of the term “postal channels” itself has remained undefined and
conspicuously vague, so far that Article 10 (a) has reportedly resulted in more
litigation than any other provision of the Service Convention. 203

198. PHIL. CONST., art. II, § 2.
199. SPECIAL ADR RULES, A.M. No. 07-11-08-SC (Sept. 1, 2009).
200. Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) v. United Planners
Consultants, Inc. (UPCI), G.R. No. 212081, 751 SCRA 389, 398 (2015).
201. Id. at 406.
203. Hawkins, supra note 18, at 207 (citing PRACTICAL HANDBOOK 2006, supra note
103).
At the outset, the Philippines has objected to Article 10 (a) of the Service
Convention, which allows for transmission through postal channels. 204
Nonetheless, the issues relating to the same were discussed in the 1989 Report
of the Special Commission —
It was pointed out that the postal channel for service constitutes a method
which is quite separate from service via the Central Authorities or between
judicial officers. Article 10 [a] in effect offered a reservation to Contracting
States to consider that service by mail was an infringement of their
sovereignty. Thus, theoretical doubts about the legal nature of the procedure
were unjustified. Nonetheless, certain courts in the United States of America
in opinions cited in the ‘Checklist’ had concluded that service of process
abroad by mail was not permitted under the Convention.
The Japanese delegation explained that their Government wished the
following statement of position to be made known:
‘Japanese position on Article 10 [a] of the Hague Convention on the Service
Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters:
Japan has not declared that it objects to the sending of judicial documents, by postal
channels, directly to persons abroad. In this connection, Japan has made it clear that
no objection to the use of postal channels for sending judicial documents to persons
in Japan does not necessarily imply that the sending by such a method is considered
valid service in Japan; it merely indicates that Japan does not consider it as
infringement of its sovereign power.’
It was understood that the Japanese position as expressed in this statement
would be included in the next revision of the Practical Handbook on the
Hague Service Convention. 205
It should be noted that the failure of the State of destination to object to
a particular channel of transmission under Article 10 of the Service
Convention “should not be imputed to mean that the State of destination will
regard the resulting service to be sufficient for later enforcement of judgment
in that State[.]” 206 Certain Contracting States have expressed this view; hence,
no objection made by a Contracting State to the use of postal channels (or
other alternative channels of transmission) for sending judicial documents to
persons within the Contracting State does not necessarily imply that the
sending by such method will be considered valid service in the Contracting

205. Permanent Bureau, supra note 167, ¶¶ 16–17 (emphasis supplied).
206. HCCH, supra note 11, at L, ¶ 22.
State. 207 It may merely indicate that the Contracting State does not consider
such alternative mode under Article 10 as an infringement of its sovereignty. 208
Recently, technological advances have also been examined in light of the
Service Convention. In this regard, the 2014 Special Commission encourages
and welcomes studies conducted on the use of information technology in the
operation of the Service Convention. 209 In fact, requests for service
transmitted through the Central Authority may be executed by electronic
means under Article 5, subject to the internal law of the Requested State. 210
Recent “developments have included movements towards electronic court
filings, the admission of electronic documents as evidence, and expanded
notions of service of process.” 211 Some courts have expressed the opinion that
service by email or other electronic means is proper even if a Contracting
Party has objected to service through postal channels, so long as no explicit
objection to service through electronic means is expressly made. 212 In fact,
one U.S. District Court has gone so far as to serve process on the defendant
by email and two social networking sites, Facebook and LinkedIn, for a
defendant in Turkey. 213 This is because, although Turkey objected to service
by postal channels, it did not object to service by email or social media. 214
V. CONCLUSION
With the Philippines’ accession to the Service Convention, 215 the (long) days
of serving documents through diplomatic and consular channels no longer
have to be the norm. In order to further benefit from the Hague Conventions,
this Author recommends that the Philippines should consider, and seriously
207. Id.
208. See id. at XLIX, ¶ 19.
209. HCCH, supra note 164, ¶ 36.
210. Id. at 37.
211. Yvonne A. Tamayo, Are You Being Served?: E-mail and (Due) Service of Process, 51
S.C.L. REV. 227, 228 (2000).
212. Louise Ellen Teitz, Is the Hague Service Convention Ready for Early Retirement at Age
Fifty-Five? Or Can it be ‘Serviceable’ in a World Without Borders?, in HCCH A|
BRIDGED EDITION 2019: THE HCCH SERVICE CONVENTION IN THE ERA OF
ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 62, n. 177 (2020).
213. WhosHere, Inc. v. Orun, Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00526-AJT-TRJ, at 1 (E.D.
Va. 2014) (U.S.).
214. Id. at 6.
215. Department of Foreign Affairs, supra note 1.
study, acceding to other Hague Conventions — such as the Evidence

Convention, 216 Convention of 23 November 2007 on the International
Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance, 217
Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements, 218 and the latest
Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters, 219 in a way that would best serve
the Filipinos.
The Philippines is currently party to four HCCH Conventions, 220
namely: (1) the Service Convention; (2) the Convention of 5 October 1961
Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents or
the Apostille Convention; 221 (3) the Convention of 25 October 1980 on the
Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction; 222 and (4) Convention of 29
May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of
Intercountry Adoption. 223 There is coherence and cohesion in accession to
the other HCCH Conventions. Thus, this Author advocates accession to more
of the Hague Conventions in order that the Philippines moves towards greater
international judicial assistance and cooperation, and legal cooperation.
The HCCH Conventions advocate not only greater legal and judicial
assistance and cooperation technology 224 but adapt to the modernizing
technological developments. The Philippines should move towards accession
to the other HCCH Conventions and should consider including such within
the Philippine procedural law framework.
216. Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters,

signed Mar. 18, 1970, 847 U.N.T.S. 240.
217 Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms
of Family Maintenance, signed Nov. 23, 2007, S. Treaty Doc. No. 110–21.
218. Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, signed June 30, 2005, 44
I.L.M. 1294.
219. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil
or Commercial Matters, signed July 2, 2019.
221. Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public
Documents, opened for signature Oct. 5, 1961, 527 U.N.T.S. 189.
222. Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, signed Oct.
25, 1980, 1343 U.N.T.S. 89.
223. Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of
Intercountry Adoption, signed May 29, 1993, S. Treaty Doc. No. 105–51.
224. See Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, pmbl.

The Hague Service Convention A Practical Step Towards Greater International Legal Cooperation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Hague Service Convention A Practical Step Towards Greater International Legal Cooperation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Hague Service Convention: A Practical

Step Towards Greater International Legal

I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 267

Cite as 66 ATENEO L.J. 266 (2021).

1. Department of Foreign Affairs, PH Deposits Instrument of Accession to the

served by local authorities, and at other times, send the documents by

international cooperation for a more unified transnational service of processes

II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION

A. A Brief History of the HCCH and the Service Convention

international civil procedure and the recognition of documents, and

23. Escolar, supra note 5. See also id.

In October 1964, the HCCH convened to formulate a convention on

B. Scope and Applicability of the Service Convention

39. Malaya & De Dumo-Cornista, supra note 6, at 67.

The Service Convention is applicable to “civil or commercial matters” 46

46. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 1.

(3) The Philippines objects to the transmission channels under paragraphs a

1. Main Channel of Transmission

50. HCCH, Declaration/Reservation/Notification (Philippines), available at

Requested State effects service of the document, or causes service thereof, in

55. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 5.

2. Alternative Channels of Transmission

The Philippines has declared under Article 8 of the Service Convention

66. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 8.

judicial officers, officials[,] or other competent persons of the State of

76. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 10 (c).

agreements between Parties to the 1905 Civil Procedure Convention 84 and

C. Protection of the Defendant

90. Id. art. 15.

III. APPLICATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION ON THE SERVICE OF

A. Overview of the Supreme Court Guidelines on the Implementation in the

96. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 16.

abroad of judicial documents[;] however, [w]here applicable, the provisions of

101. Id. ¶ I, (5).

sovereignty or security. 105 Notably, Article 4 of the Service Convention

the provision on forwarding authorities, and defines them as the “authority or

114. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 3.

The Model Form is annexed to the Service Convention, as well as the

1. Outbound Requests for Service

124. HCCH, supra note 36.

2. Inbound Requests for Service

129. Id. ¶ II (2), (3), & (4).

(d) The Request and its attachments are accomplished/translated in English

132. Id. ¶ III (2).

136. Id. ¶ III (5).

by a copy of the documents served, in cases of successful service, or the

139. Id. ¶ ¶ III (10), IV (1), & V (2).

1. Outbound Requests for Service of Judicial Documents

149. Id. (emphasis supplied).

In Luzon Iron Development Group Corp. v. Bridestone Mining and Development

2. Inbound Requests for Service of Judicial Documents

154. Luzon Iron Development Group Corporation v. Bridestone Mining and

Contracting State’s internal law for the service of documents in domestic

157. Hague Service Convention, supra note 2, art. 5 (a).

IV. DEVELOPING AND EMERGING ISSUES ON THE OPERATION AND

A. On the Mandatory Nature of the Service Convention

of the Service Convention to where the address of the person to be served is

168. Id. ¶ 12.

B. Application of the Service Convention in Arbitration Proceedings

181. Id. at 138.

requirement under California law in favor of notification by a method chosen

191. Id. at 144.

C. Transmission of Documents via Postal Channels, E-mail, and Social Media